This copy is for your personal non-commercial use only. To order presentation-ready copies of Toronto Star content for distribution to colleagues, clients or customers, or inquire about permissions/licensing, please go to: www.TorontoStarReprints.com

John Gerretsen lays down law on sharing public information about court cases: Cohn

A fog has crept into the courthouses of the province, obscuring the public’s view of what happens in criminal trials.

Now, after a bit of prodding, Attorney General John Gerretsen wants to clear the air.

"The public has a right to know what’s going on in our court system,” Attorney General John Gerretson, pictured in 2010, told the Star's Martin Regg Cohn. (Colin McConnell / Toronto Star file photo)

Gerretsen is sending a message to courthouse officials that, henceforth, they must be “consistently helpful” in sharing public information about court cases with the public — including the media.

“The public has a right to know what’s going on in our court system,” the attorney general told me emphatically.

In normal circumstances, the conduct of court clerks might not seem so weighty a matter as to require intervention from the top law officer of the crown. But it does, now, and here’s why:

Article Continued Below

Of late, some court clerks have been thwarting legitimate requests from journalists for the vital bits of data that catalogue a criminal’s footprints through our labyrinthine legal system. Toronto Star reporters have been stymied when seeking a straightforward synopsis of a court case known as “the information” — a summary of the verdict or other decision provided in public hearings.

Such details can help journalists stitch together a timeline of how a criminal moves through the justice system — for example, friends and associates of Mayor Rob Ford who have been convicted of a crime in open court when no reporters happened to be present. And where there is a public interest.

Guilty? Acquitted? Charges withdrawn?

If it happened in public view, why should some court clerks be reticent — after the fact — to share any relevant data on their computer screens? In an era of instant databases, don’t we deserve to know what is on the public record rather than allow court clerks to play footsie — or Twenty Questions — by insisting on the exact date or location inputs?

Being only human, some courthouse clerks can act imperiously and capriciously on a bad day. But there is no excuse for passive-aggressive-obstructive behaviour that undermines the administration of justice.

Without “the information” about public proceedings — described by Star reporter Jesse McLean as the “Coles Notes” of a case — the system can become a black hole where convictions disappear from the public’s memory, lost in time. Unless the court clerk is in the mood to be helpful by adding a few search terms, or cross-referencing the name of the accused.

Responding to questions for a story by McLean last month, an unnamed spokesperson in the attorney general’s ministry issued a mealy-mouthed statement saying officials would look into the matter (in the fullness of time) and review their policies (in due course). It sounded like bureaucratic bafflegab, not an unequivocal statement of first principles.

Article Continued Below

Why not a bold declaration that public access is a cornerstone of the justice system? Why not exhort court clerks, who work for the people of Ontario, to be reasonably helpful when the media seek to exercise their legal right to access public information?

Last week, I told Gerretsen about this upcoming column and asked if he couldn’t do any better. When we reconvened this week, the attorney general delivered his verdict:

“Following our discussion last week I had a meeting with my deputy and made it quite clear to him that all public information that is available through court offices, there should be a standard policy across the province,” Gerretsen said.

“He’s looking into some of the inconsistencies, because there are, just like you’re saying — in some courthouses, people are more likely to provide that information than in other courthouses.”

If a reporter gets all gussied up in a finely tailored suit, dressed to resemble a smooth-talking lawyer, he may win more co-operation from a court clerk. But a journalist shouldn’t have to charm a clerk into submission, or depend on the kindness of strangers.

Now, Gerretsen has ordered his deputy minister, Patrick Monahan — a former dean of Osgoode Hall law school — to get to the bottom of the problem and get the message out.

“I spoke to my deputy again this morning,” the attorney general replied when I asked whether they can make this work. “Absolutely, absolutely.”

A long-practicing lawyer in Kingston before coming to Queen’s Park, Gerretsen says no one should withhold public information on a personal whim: “It should be able to be obtained by anybody at all.”

In a column last month after the ministry issued its inconclusive statement, the Star’s Public Editor, Kathy English, wrote: “I hope the ministry clears up this confusion. Most of all, I hope someone with some power there understands how important this information is to the reporting of credible and accurate information in the public interest.”

Well put. To which the attorney general has now replied with his ruling. Let’s see if court clerks get the message — and follow the rules.

More from The Star & Partners

LOADING

Copyright owned or licensed by Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or distribution of this content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Toronto Star Newspapers Limited and/or its licensors. To order copies of Toronto Star articles, please go to: www.TorontoStarReprints.com